Right, this is the championship. And thats why I honestly don't understand the 'okay, I am out' statements I get here or on skype.

I can understand that 16 is an surprising option, I can understand that vets don't like it much. So go, and vote for 10,12 or 14.What I can't understand is that some give up even before a final result is displayed and even before they give it a try.If you would like to have the trophy and be mentioned as part of the best alliance of BD you should be able to make it, no matter what the alliance size will be.

Like I said before, this poll shows the wide range of the player requests.I took out an 8 member alliance option (as several alliances would have to kick 2 persons out) and I also didn't want 20, or even 36 person alliances.

State your opinion! Say why you think an x-members alliance will be good to have. I am in this case just the middleman. The decision is up to you

Right, this is the championship. And thats why I honestly don't understand the 'okay, I am out' statements I get here or on skype.

I can understand that 16 is an surprising option, I can understand that vets don't like it much. So go, and vote for 10,12 or 14.What I can't understand is that some give up even before a final result is displayed and even before they give it a try.If you would like to have the trophy and be mentioned as part of the best alliance of BD you should be able to make it, no matter what the alliance size will be.

Like I said before, this poll shows the wide range of the player requests.I took out an 8 member alliance option (as several alliances would have to kick 2 persons out) and I also didn't want 20, or even 36 person alliances.

State your opinion! Say why you think an x-members alliance will be good to have. I am in this case just the middleman. The decision is up to you

Hey, Ilona, I can't say for sure but the people who will or have voted on this are are mostly the people who click to get here via the mass messages. Not all these people are qualified to vote IMHO. This is because a lot of the players do not think to consider how 16 player alliances will affect the overall game. But most people will think something like "16 people in one alliance?!?! CHAOS wooot..." And so while it is good that you are trying to give the community what it wants, these votes are too important to give out to ALL the players. The way it's going, 16 man alliances will be where the majority lies. 70%+ already voted for 16 persons, no way that's getting toppled. When it comes to decisions like this, it should be left up to you the admins and community leaders to carefully consider past experiences and decide. After all, most of you have played these game to some extent and know the mind of the player...

Liran is correct in that majority of players that vote here will be a the beginning those that are the newbs that may not have played too many rounds. Most vets usually discuss topics like this on skype and other chat channels. It is why we usually vote the same way on these polls whenever they happen. We have played this game for quite some time, years and still some of us have spent half a decade on this game or more. Our experience and honestly our vindication of this game by the fact that we still play it despite many of us having a low opinion of its current form is that when we speak, we speak what is best for this game going forward.

This topic in general, this vote on alliance size shouldn't even be happening as experience from the past has easily shown that smaller alliance sizes are better. If we are not learning from our past, then there is something wrong here.

Vets, players with rounds under their belt that have seen the different alliance sizes, please make your voice known here and make your vote known.

Let us make sure this CHAMPIONSHIP round is not ruined. Good luck to all that play and make sure this is a great round, to surpass even the last. Please manage the sub and family usage and don't make it ridiculous. It is a team game and not a game of how many friends you can make. Make it war among each team and let the world erupt. Until all relics are taken by 1 team, this round will not end. Make use of that, and those that really have the dedication to win will win this round.

Here's me announcing my retirement from Battledawn for the foreseeable future. I have spent a good part of my life playing this game and it has been a pleasurable part of it. I have met so many people and made so many friends all around the world. That is what makes this game so great despite its many flaws. The networks we make..the connections around the world. Use it players..make a benefit of it.

Michael, Tacti Soft Creator and Owner, please listen to your players, your users, your customers. Make this game what it should be and make sure your admins, devs are in top shape.

Man 176 voted for 16 man alliance... now as everyone player who has played somewhere seriously mentioned that 16 man alliance would be a nuisance... isn't the main reason bd reduced the number of players per alliance to increase competition and thus income... then why backtracking now? I don't know who coined the idea of having a 16 man CE but surely he didn't play enough... its quite clear which will be winning suggestion... 1 thing is guaranteed it will definitely hurt both for serious alliances and with tacticsoft...

Ilona first thing if u call ur self democrats & believe in representative democracy then where does ur democracy goes while u guys make an update( for eg 3rd & 2nd alliance reward) then tat time did u ask ur community tat should we reduce it ? u mean tat particular time this democratic government changes a dictatorial government which just changes rules just as simply like changing clothes without taking ur community's word? huh?

Second thing I would like to say I'm not a big name in game , I'm not tat important player to BD so u can't change anything just for me , but bue/venom , ROFL leader c'mon man , he is way more important & will anytime provide ,more competition in the game My main point is , I don't remember u guys having polls for CE date which is again against ur democracy , I mean like there many pros who won't be able to play Its nothing for me , nor I'm saying my 2nd point for myself , I play or don't play it doesn't matter

All i can say that most people that voted 16 man alliance are new to BD and don't know the side effects and are not gonna play CE...They just saw...(Wow alliance size 16?? Lets see how a 16 man team era is) And thus they voted to 16...

In my opinion alliance size should be 10 as there are 10 medals..Last time i heard in some posts that people are arguing that Ilona said she will give medals to all rank 1 members...

I can just say that if there will be 16 man era then CE will be in loss and many people won't play as i am sure...

If the alliance size will be 16 then only about 3-4 alliances will be on CE which will aim to win(Maybe less)..Others won't play and that will be ruin to CE which no one wants..

Admins also know that most people these days are new and don't know what a 16 man era can lead to..They just saw it as a new so voted for it like we have been playing 10 or 12 man alliance eras...Lets try a 16 man alliance era...And so they voted and other new players just went with the flow..

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum